Jewish Forum & Discussions - Chabad Talk  

Go Back   Jewish Forum & Discussions - Chabad Talk > Lubavitch > Chassidus

Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Unread 07-13-2007, 10:33 AM   #26
Yankel Nosson
Senior Platinum Member
 
Yankel Nosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
I think the main thing is that I want it to be consistent with how I see reality. I understand B"B 10b and I accept it 100%. Perhaps over the centuries since this Chazal, the Jewish people has succeeded, at least in the US, to elevate the uho, and so today the % of those from kn is much higher than it was 50 years ago, or 100 years ago or 2000 years ago.
The Rebbe takka said that Esav is ready to be elevated. (Nonetheless, the Rebbe pointed out that one must always be choshed becauseהלכה היא בידוע שעשיו שונא ליעקב)

The Rebbe encouraged "charity" among bnei Noach, while acknowledging that many opinons do not include it as part of the 7 mitzvos. The Rebbe based it on the interpretation of RYB"Z in the gemara that חסד לאומים חטאת means כשם שהחטאת מכפרת על ישראל כך צדקה מכפרת על אומות העולם.

The Rebbe referred in 5751 during the Gulf War to the Patriot missiles manned by Americans as "one non-Jew aimed a missile at a concentration of Jewish people and another non-Jew, a righteous gentile, dispatched another missile which intercepted it." (sichos in english translation, don't have time to find the original loshon)

(There could also be an inyan of the population of America representing in part a "birrur" of the "tov sh'b'Esav" (having separated out from the population of the "old world"), but that's just my own idea.)


By the way, one of those letters from the Rebbe is translated into English here.
By the way, one of the
__________________
Chassidim must study Chassidus--HaYom Yom 21Kislev
Yankel Nosson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2007, 11:13 AM   #27
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gevurah View Post
Oy Vey

first the more children the merrier and the more chassidus will be discussed.

But you are not going to see a monolithic reality and pulling out the ol klipah meter is not going to give a consistent reading and the % depends on how you average which means results can get fudged.

Besides it only takes one ******, one Stalin blot them names out...yet % could be better... median, mode, etc..

I was afraid you were getting towards making the ol unified field theory...

Mayim Mayim said Akiva...
Ok. which shabbos is good? Just one question: do you speak the way you write. If so, I'll just be nodding my head yes to everything you say the entire shabbos.

Mayim Mayim said Rebbi Akiva...I think he said "don't say mayim mayim"...
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2007, 11:14 AM   #28
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankel Nosson View Post
The Rebbe takka said that Esav is ready to be elevated. (Nonetheless, the Rebbe pointed out that one must always be choshed becauseהלכה היא בידוע שעשיו שונא ליעקב)

The Rebbe encouraged "charity" among bnei Noach, while acknowledging that many opinons do not include it as part of the 7 mitzvos. The Rebbe based it on the interpretation of RYB"Z in the gemara that חסד לאומים חטאת means כשם שהחטאת מכפרת על ישראל כך צדקה מכפרת על אומות העולם.

The Rebbe referred in 5751 during the Gulf War to the Patriot missiles manned by Americans as "one non-Jew aimed a missile at a concentration of Jewish people and another non-Jew, a righteous gentile, dispatched another missile which intercepted it." (sichos in english translation, don't have time to find the original loshon)

(There could also be an inyan of the population of America representing in part a "birrur" of the "tov sh'b'Esav" (having separated out from the population of the "old world"), but that's just my own idea.)


By the way, one of those letters from the Rebbe is translated into English here.
By the way, one of the
Really excellent! Thank you!
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2007, 11:44 AM   #29
Yankel Nosson
Senior Platinum Member
 
Yankel Nosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
Really excellent! Thank you!
Also, the Rebbe would refer quite favorably to the founders of this country (referring to the pilgrims, not the revolutionaries), as seen in here (video) and here (print).

Quote:
It is appropriate to reiterate that the character of this nation is based on faith in G-d. And we speak not of an abstract Super Being; but of G-d, Creator and Master of the world.

One can profess belief in a Creator while failing to recognize G-d’s interest in the details of the world and in man’s mortal actions. Our nation however, is built on the principles established by the founding fathers. When they landed on these shores one of their first acts was to set and proclaim a holiday of Thanksgiving to the Creator and Master of the world who had saved them from danger and brought them to these safe shores. Here they could live without fear, religious persecution or oppressive decrees. Here they could conduct their lives according to their sacred beliefs. Their thanksgiving expressed this faith: G-d not only created the world but also directs the events of the world. They recognized the providence of G-d in their salvation.
__________________
Chassidim must study Chassidus--HaYom Yom 21Kislev
Yankel Nosson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2007, 10:07 PM   #30
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
I thought of two proofs for why "chesed l'umim chatas" and "nishmasan mi'gimmel klippos" don't apply to chassidei umos haolam:

1. The Rambam writes in Hilchos Melachim 10:13 the following about how we accept their tzedaka and give it to poor Yidden:
יג [י] בן נוח שרצה לעשות מצוה משאר מצוות התורה, כדי לקבל שכר--אין מונעין אותו לעשות אותה כהלכתה. ואם הביא עולה, מקבלין ממנו. נתן צדקה, מקבלין ממנו; וייראה לי שנותנין אותה לעניי ישראל, הואיל והוא ניזון מישראל, ומצוה עליהם להחיותו. אבל הגוי שנתן צדקה--מקבלין ממנו, ונותנין אותה לעניי גויים.

If their tzedaka was a cheit and it came from the realm of ra, then the Rambam wouldn't poskin that it is given to Yidden.

2. The teaching from Tanna d'vei Eliyahu that I brought in one of my first posts states that ruach hakodesh can rest even on a goy depending on his deeds. What kind of a goy could this be? Can't be an idolator, can't be a ger (he's not a goy). So it can only be a chassid umos haolam. And how could holiness - ruach hakodesh - rest upon him/her if they were still from the gimmel klippos? Must be they are no longer from the gimmel klippos.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-15-2007, 11:53 AM   #31
Yankel Nosson
Senior Platinum Member
 
Yankel Nosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,259
Proof from ruach hakodesh? Not necessarily.

Bilaam was a total rasha and he didn't only have ruach hakodesh (a lower level) but actual nevuah comparable to Moshe Rabbeinu. Furthermore, the gimmel klipos are enlivened by a nitzutz which is itself from kedusha.

Probably best to avoid "filling in the gaps" in these inyonim.
__________________
Chassidim must study Chassidus--HaYom Yom 21Kislev
Yankel Nosson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-15-2007, 12:33 PM   #32
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankel Nosson View Post
Proof from ruach hakodesh? Not necessarily.

Bilaam was a total rasha and he didn't only have ruach hakodesh (a lower level) but actual nevuah comparable to Moshe Rabbeinu. Furthermore, the gimmel klipos are enlivened by a nitzutz which is itself from kedusha.

Probably best to avoid "filling in the gaps" in these inyonim.
I'm modeh to that. But I still have proof #1.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-15-2007, 03:12 PM   #33
Yankel Nosson
Senior Platinum Member
 
Yankel Nosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
I'm modeh to that. But I still have proof #1.
No offense, but I don't see it as a proof.

Take a look at Matos, where the Bnei Yisroel are directed to divide up the financial spoils of a nation so evil that they were almost completely killed out!

And rak lahoir, there can be a goy who is not an idolator yet is not an Noahide either!
__________________
Chassidim must study Chassidus--HaYom Yom 21Kislev
Yankel Nosson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-15-2007, 05:32 PM   #34
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankel Nosson View Post
No offense, but I don't see it as a proof.

Take a look at Matos, where the Bnei Yisroel are directed to divide up the financial spoils of a nation so evil that they were almost completely killed out!

And rak lahoir, there can be a goy who is not an idolator yet is not an Noahide either!
Benefiting from the spoils of these wars is different than benefiting from a live person. Midian's power was wiped out - all of their men were gone - they were not a nation anymore. We were allowed to use their stuff after the war because it couldn't give strength to the sitra achara anymore. But with a living representative of the sitra achara, it's a different story. The Rambam in the above halacha says that we do not give the tzedaka of a non-ben Noach to Yidden (look at BB 10b for the reasons for not allowing this). But we are allowed to give strength and life to a Ben Noach/Chassid umos ha olam by letting him have the great zechus of giving to Yidden- it must be allowed because we are not giving strength and life to the sitra achara through this. It's also a posuk in Chumash- "the resident stranger will live with you" - we are required to give them strength and life. It can't be that we would have a mitzvah to give strength to the sitra achara.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-15-2007, 05:53 PM   #35
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Even if my sevara is no proof (although it might be), we still have two more proofs:
1. The AR's Sidur Im d'ach, Shaar Chag HaMatzos
2. Rav Hillel mi'Paritch's Likutei Biurim, pg. 47b

Did you ever see these inside? I haven't seen them yet.
These sources say (according to a note in Tanya in English) that the nefashos of the chassidei umos haolam come from KN. And this is a steera to IK vol.1 , pg 176, where the Rebbe says that their nefashos are also from GKT. So who do we hold by? The AR or the Rebbe? (Yes, in that other letter YN showed us, vol 3:152, the Rebbe says that the source of life of things in GKT can change through birurim but the letter says nothing specifically about chassidei umos ha olam.)

Last edited by MrFinkelstein; 07-15-2007 at 07:29 PM.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 10:44 AM   #36
Yankel Nosson
Senior Platinum Member
 
Yankel Nosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
Even if my sevara is no proof (although it might be), we still have two more proofs:
1. The AR's Sidur Im d'ach, Shaar Chag HaMatzos
2. Rav Hillel mi'Paritch's Likutei Biurim, pg. 47b

Did you ever see these inside? I haven't seen them yet.
These sources say (according to a note in Tanya in English) that the nefashos of the chassidei umos haolam come from KN. And this is a steera to IK vol.1 , pg 176, where the Rebbe says that their nefashos are also from GKT. So who do we hold by? The AR or the Rebbe? (Yes, in that other letter YN showed us, vol 3:152, the Rebbe says that the source of life of things in GKT can change through birurim but the letter says nothing specifically about chassidei umos ha olam.)
What exactly do you mean by proof? It's brought down in the Alter Rebbe's name.

Maybe return to your original question.

Just to note, pnimiyus hatorah is not like nigleh. It's not about who can make a better case for their "shita". No shitas, only divrei Elokim Chayim. Although there is room for one's own "אולי יש לומר", this is not to be confused with the true divrei Elokim Chayim. Especially in regards to Tanya.

Now, I think your original question revolved around the statement in Tanya that "ein bahem tov klal" and how could they be subject to 7 mitzovs, how could they later become a bnei noach or one of the chasidei umos haolam (or a ger, for that matter). If you re-read the thread and some of the Rebbe's letters referenced there I think you will find your answer.
__________________
Chassidim must study Chassidus--HaYom Yom 21Kislev
Yankel Nosson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 12:41 PM   #37
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankel Nosson View Post
What exactly do you mean by proof? It's brought down in the Alter Rebbe's name.
I really meant a sevarah, not a proof.

Quote:
Maybe return to your original question.

Just to note, pnimiyus hatorah is not like nigleh. It's not about who can make a better case for their "shita". No shitas, only divrei Elokim Chayim. Although there is room for one's own "אולי יש לומר", this is not to be confused with the true divrei Elokim Chayim. Especially in regards to Tanya.

Now, I think your original question revolved around the statement in Tanya that "ein bahem tov klal" and how could they be subject to 7 mitzovs, how could they later become a bnei noach or one of the chasidei umos haolam (or a ger, for that matter). If you re-read the thread and some of the Rebbe's letters referenced there I think you will find your answer.
I asked a few questions. The only thing I can't swallow is that righteous gentiles like Raul Wallenberg (Gevura's example) are from the GKT which means all the good he did was really done for ulterior motives. And I am sure he didn't study the 7 mitzvos with a rabbi and do them because Hashem commanded them at Sinai. And yet, he was just one example of this. There are plenty of gentiles who do not meet the Rambam's halachic criteria of a Ben Noach, who are capable of doing and have done and do acts of unconditional love. All the more so, those halachic B'nei Noach all over the world! In the Torah we are commanded to sustain them. Hashem would not command us to sustain the GKT! In IK vol 1, pg. 176, the Rebbe clearly held (at least at that time) that the chassidei umos haolam - the ones who get olam habah - are from GKT. In that other letter he only mentions a gentile who becomes a ger, not a Ben Noach; that such a person has released the sparks of kedusha from the GKT. To me this does not sit well at all. On top of that we have a glaring contradiction - allegedly in Siddur Im d'ach and R' Hillel's sefer it disagrees with the Rebbe's letter on pg. 176 by saying that the chassidei umos haolam come from KN! But we don't have one statement from the Rebbe that chassidei umos ha olam come from KN, rather we have the opposite in that letter. All of this just does not make any sense. Frankly, I am just about through with this inyan because all I see are a lot of contradictions that can't be reconciled.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 12:54 PM   #38
JewishHiphop
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
I really meant a sevarah, not a proof.

I asked a few questions. The only thing I can't swallow is that righteous gentiles like Raul Wallenberg (Gevura's example) are from the GKT which means all the good he did was really done for ulterior motives. And I am sure he didn't study the 7 mitzvos with a rabbi and do them because Hashem commanded them at Sinai. And yet, he was just one example of this. There are plenty of gentiles who do not meet the Rambam's halachic criteria of a Ben Noach, who are capable of doing and have done and do acts of unconditional love. All the more so, those halachic B'nei Noach all over the world! In the Torah we are commanded to sustain them. Hashem would not command us to sustain the GKT! In IK vol 1, pg. 176, the Rebbe clearly held (at least at that time) that the chassidei umos haolam - the ones who get olam habah - are from GKT. In that other letter he only mentions a gentile who becomes a ger, not a Ben Noach; that such a person has released the sparks of kedusha from the GKT. To me this does not sit well at all. On top of that we have a glaring contradiction - allegedly in Siddur Im d'ach and R' Hillel's sefer it disagrees with the Rebbe's letter on pg. 176 by saying that the chassidei umos haolam come from KN! But we don't have one statement from the Rebbe that chassidei umos ha olam come from KN, rather we have the opposite in that letter. All of this just does not make any sense. Frankly, I am just about through with this inyan because all I see are a lot of contradictions that can't be reconciled.
You make a good pt about Raoul Wallenberg. I do not think that the Rebbe would disagree with the view of the Alter Rebbe in this case. I just took a look at the letter 1:176 and I am not sure that I understood why you see a contradiction here. Please clarify further your position.
JewishHiphop is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 01:01 PM   #39
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by JewishHiphop View Post
You make a good pt about Raoul Wallenberg. I do not think that the Rebbe would disagree with the view of the Alter Rebbe in this case. I just took a look at the letter 1:176 and I am not sure that I understood why you see a contradiction here. Please clarify further your position.
In that letter the Rebbe says that because there are chassidei umos haolam in the world who get olam habah, one may think they come from KN....but the truth is they don't. That's it.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 01:05 PM   #40
TakehBored
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 139
i was hesitant to write in this discussion because i do not remember where i saw this, a sefer, an article, a mokor musmach, not musmach etc. in short i do not know if this can be relied upon, but it might shed some light on the dicussion and trigger someone's memory as to where this actually says.

the chida (others too?) writes that the gemoro says ger shenisgayer implying that he is a ger even before he is megayer, because the ger was always different from the average goy, he essentialy wasn't born a goy but a ger, he just had to reveal it. and therefore the gemoro does not say goy shenisgayer.

now, a potential ger can be born, but because of the circumstances of his life never made it to actual geirus. (just like many yiden who are born and never make it to a life of torah and mitzvos - tinokos shenishbu). this goy is not a regural goy but someone who is a potential ger, meaning that he has a different nefesh than the average goy. i do not know what raoul wallenberg's motive was - because even if he did it only because he couldn't stand that these innocent peopel should be killed that would not be chesed lishmo, but rather it would be chesed legarmaihu to avoid the feeling that he couldn't live with* - but if you find a goy who truly did something selflessly, and honestly there is no way to know get into the person to know what his true motive is, but if such a person is found, perhaps the explanation is as above.

* i am not saying that raoul wallenberg does not deserve gan eden, he certainly does get olom habo for saving so many yiden. but his chesed could still have benn chesed leumim chatos.
TakehBored is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 01:08 PM   #41
Yankel Nosson
Senior Platinum Member
 
Yankel Nosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
I asked a few questions. The only thing I can't swallow is that righteous gentiles like Raul Wallenberg (Gevura's example) are from the GKT which means all the good he did was really done for ulterior motives. And I am sure he didn't study the 7 mitzvos with a rabbi and do them because Hashem commanded them at Sinai. And yet, he was just one example of this. There are plenty of gentiles who do not meet the Rambam's halachic criteria of a Ben Noach, who are capable of doing and have done and do acts of unconditional love. All the more so, those halachic B'nei Noach all over the world! In the Torah we are commanded to sustain them. Hashem would not command us to sustain the GKT! In IK vol 1, pg. 176, the Rebbe clearly held (at least at that time) that the chassidei umos haolam - the ones who get olam habah - are from GKT. In that other letter he only mentions a gentile who becomes a ger, not a Ben Noach; that such a person has released the sparks of kedusha from the GKT. To me this does not sit well at all. On top of that we have a glaring contradiction - allegedly in Siddur Im d'ach and R' Hillel's sefer it disagrees with the Rebbe's letter on pg. 176 by saying that the chassidei umos haolam come from KN! But we don't have one statement from the Rebbe that chassidei umos ha olam come from KN, rather we have the opposite in that letter. All of this just does not make any sense. Frankly, I am just about through with this inyan because all I see are a lot of contradictions that can't be reconciled.
A few contradictions and you're ready to give up? Yagaati u-matsasi, Mr. Finkelstein!

You are trying to understand Chassidus through olam hazeh glasses. Doesn't fit. You have to try to understand Chassidus on its own terms and then try to understand how the world as we see it corresponds. The letter you claimed not to be able to understand is critical to this discussion. Yagaati u-matsasi

I would also suggest that there are numerous dimensions of the nations of the world that can be taken into account:
  • Idolator
  • non-idolator, non-Noachide
  • Keeper of the Noachide Laws without the Rambam's tano'im
  • Keeper of the Noachide Laws, al pi Rambam
  • Chassidei Umos Haolam
__________________
Chassidim must study Chassidus--HaYom Yom 21Kislev
Yankel Nosson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 01:28 PM   #42
JewishHiphop
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
In that letter the Rebbe says that because there are chassidei umos haolam in the world who get olam habah, one may think they come from KN....but the truth is they don't. That's it.
With all due respect, I do not see where the Rebbe implies this in that letter. I am almost positive that the Rebbe would agree that the Bnai Noah are related to kelpat nogah, if you like I can search for some more precise references.
JewishHiphop is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 01:31 PM   #43
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Thank you everybody for the time and effort you have put into this conversation, especially YN and JHH. Yashar koach! I need to take a break from this for a while...
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 01:32 PM   #44
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by JewishHiphop View Post
With all due respect, I do not see where the Rebbe implies this in that letter. I am almost positive that the Rebbe would agree that the Bnai Noah are related to kelpat nogah, if you like I can search for some more precise references.
Please, if you can....
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 07:24 PM   #45
JewishHiphop
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFinkelstein View Post
Please, if you can....
Here are a few sources that I came across in the past. Both from Sefer Arachim Chabad on Umot HaOlam.

2:285 (note 173) - it is written there that the souls of the nations are rooted in the Shem Havayah. Seemingly this would imply atleast an association with kelipat nogah...

2:317 - based on the davar hamatchil "chaviv adam shenivrah betzelem" 5702 chapter 1 - it is taught that the chassidei umot haolam are rooted in the human face on the divine chariot.

It would seem possible to me, imho, that according to the chabad method of chassidut which refers to 3 impure husks and then the fourth intermediary husk - nogah - so seemingly according to this shi'ta the three impure husks would correspond to the three other faces, lion, ox and eagle, whereas the face of the man on the front of the merkava - chariot is corresponding to kelipat nogah. The man who sits upon the thone corresponds to the divine soul in the individual, or to the nation of Israel in the collective scheme of creation, as is explained partially in the first maamar of Derech Mitzvothecha of the Tzemech Tzedeck z'l.
JewishHiphop is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 07:31 PM   #46
Yankel Nosson
Senior Platinum Member
 
Yankel Nosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,259
Thumbs down Calling darkness light and light darkness

Quote:
Originally Posted by JewishHiphop View Post
It would seem possible to me, imho, that according to the chabad method of chassidut which refers to 3 impure husks and then the fourth intermediary husk - nogah - so seemingly according to this shi'ta the three impure husks would correspond to the three other faces, lion, ox and eagle, whereas the face of the man on the front of the merkava - chariot is corresponding to kelipat nogah.
The merkava of klipa. Amazing.
__________________
Chassidim must study Chassidus--HaYom Yom 21Kislev
Yankel Nosson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 09:58 PM   #47
Torah613
ChabadTalk.com Elder!
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,716
Well, seems klipos also need transportation...
Torah613 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 10:26 PM   #48
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by JewishHiphop View Post
Here are a few sources that I came across in the past. Both from Sefer Arachim Chabad on Umot HaOlam.

2:285 (note 173) - it is written there that the souls of the nations are rooted in the Shem Havayah. Seemingly this would imply atleast an association with kelipat nogah...

2:317 - based on the davar hamatchil "chaviv adam shenivrah betzelem" 5702 chapter 1 - it is taught that the chassidei umot haolam are rooted in the human face on the divine chariot.

It would seem possible to me, imho, that according to the chabad method of chassidut which refers to 3 impure husks and then the fourth intermediary husk - nogah - so seemingly according to this shi'ta the three impure husks would correspond to the three other faces, lion, ox and eagle, whereas the face of the man on the front of the merkava - chariot is corresponding to kelipat nogah. The man who sits upon the thone corresponds to the divine soul in the individual, or to the nation of Israel in the collective scheme of creation, as is explained partially in the first maamar of Derech Mitzvothecha of the Tzemech Tzedeck z'l.
Thanks a lot for looking this up for me. I wasn't aware of these sources.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2007, 10:42 PM   #49
MrFinkelstein
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 725
Unhappy I went through Shaar Chag HaMatzos...

Made a trip tonight to a Chabad house and they had a copy of the siddur with the AR's peirush. I spent about an hour going over the entire chapter looking for the words "klipa", 'umos haolam" and "chassidei umos haolam". I carefully went through each line scanning for these words and "klipa nogah" is mentioned a few times and "chassidei umos haolam" two or three times but the two terms never crossed paths. It's possible that I might have missed it, but I sat there for about an hour slowly scanning each sentence with a straight edge, and I found nothing that said that the souls of the chassidei umos haolam come from KN. The closest thing I found to this was (paraphrase, near the beginning of the chapter): "There are a small number (ketzas) of chassidei umos haolam that are so affected/inspired (by their elevated spiritual perceptions) that they are able to refrain from doing evil (ra)." The AR doesn't say they are capable of doing good (tov), but only that they can get to a high enough level where they can sur me'rah (turn from doing evil).

So it appears to me that the AR never wrote in Shaar Chag HaMatzos that the chassidei umos haolam come from KN.
MrFinkelstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-18-2007, 12:36 AM   #50
The Eighth King
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,302
Did you see p. 287b-c, paragraph beginning "ולהבין בתוספת ביאור בשורש הדברים הנ"ל"?
The Eighth King is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Umos Ha'olam and the Mazolos vis a vis Tefilla and Bitachon noahidelaws Chassidus 12 08-19-2007 04:05 PM
Bechira of Umos Ha'olam noahidelaws Chassidus 21 09-28-2004 09:21 PM
Tanya, Perek 2 roza Lubavitch Derech 1 10-20-2003 09:24 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2001 - 2016 ChabadTalk.com